The left claims the rich are stealing all the money, what say you?

[rightwinger]

Uhh it's the math that shows that the money is concentrating at the top.

You can blame the left but it's the Math.

Do you understand the difference between "having" something and "stealing" something? Or do you just assume, as most leftist fools do, that if someone has something you do not, he stole it, simply by definition?

It is not a question of stealing but why do we continue economic policies that contribute to one class accumulating and protecting more money?

 

[Gideonprime]

Uhh it's the math that shows that the money is concentrating at the top.

You can blame the left but it's the Math.

Do you understand the difference between "having" something and "stealing" something? Or do you just assume, as most leftist fools do, that if someone has something you do not, he stole it, simply by definition?

It is not a question of stealing but why do we continue economic policies that contribute to one class accumulating and protecting more money?

Because that class can buy the votes they need to make it happen.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Fixed your post

Which is against the rules. I have flagged this shitty "fixed your post" and sent it to the moderaters., they may decide today it is NOT against the rules. We'll see. Meanwhile I'm going to neg your sorry ass for "fixing my post.

EEEEWWWW, I'm not bright enough to defend myself in the thread so I'll neg you.

Lighten up twisty knickers.

"EEEWWWW, I can break the rules and be offensive. That means I'm BRILLIANT!"

Grow up, Junior. No one here is going to be impressed by your ability to do something any teenager in Goth makeup at the dinner table can manage.

 

[Gideonprime]

Uhh it's the math that shows that the money is concentrating at the top.

You can blame the left but it's the Math.

Do you understand the difference between "having" something and "stealing" something? Or do you just assume, as most leftist fools do, that if someone has something you do not, he stole it, simply by definition?

Feeling guilty? I said nothing about stealing.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why? I want Hollywood to pay higher taxes too.

Infact we need to let the Bush tax cuts expire completely on all levels of income.

That is an arguement for another thread.

Why? Is there some virtue in punishing success I am not aware of?

the money lenders charge you more when you are poor, is that fair?

Insofar as the kindergarten word "fair" applies to anything in the adult world, yes. The higher interest rates charged to those with less income and worse credit reflects the greater risk to the lending institution that they represent.

Do you think it's "fair" to expect to be treated exactly like someone with good credit when you haven't done what's necessary to acquire it? Oh, wait, you're a liberal. OF COURSE you think it's "fair" to demand things you haven't earned.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Very good.
So how is raising taxes

1. Punishment.

and

2. Punishment for success?

It is punishment because you make the taxpayer pay more money. Or do you think it is a civic duty?
It punishes success because with a progressive system the more you make, the more you pay, and at a higher percentage rate. So the first dollar is taxed the same. But as you make more and more you keep less and less. That is punishment, taking someone's hard earned money.

It is a necessary evil. Cost of doing business. Keeps the nation strong keeps you in customers, keeps you with roads to distribute your product on, gives you cops to stop peole from stealing your product on the way to market, firemen who put outt he fire at your factory. Etc Etc Etc.

Punishment! HA!

Since no one else has bothered to point this out so far, I'll do it: your conflation of federal, state, and local taxes does not prove your point. In fact, it proves your point WRONG, because if you had anything real to say, you wouldn't need to be dishonest in saying it.

Of course, the same could be said for your puerile pretense that all taxes are for things like "roads and cops and firemen", and therefore they cannot possibly be cut because it would leave us without such things. Yes, because we all know how much NEA grants, for example, keep cops on the street.

 

[Gideonprime]

Since no one else has bothered to point this out so far, I'll do it: your conflation of federal, state, and local taxes does not prove your point. In fact, it proves your point WRONG, because if you had anything real to say, you wouldn't need to be dishonest in saying it.

Of course, the same could be said for your puerile pretense that all taxes are for things like "roads and cops and firemen", and therefore they cannot possibly be cut because it would leave us without such things. Yes, because we all know how much NEA grants, for example, keep cops on the street.

Well seeing as we were discussing taxes why should I differentiate between the two?

Certainly not all taxes keep soldiers at their posts and fireman putting out fires.

That said, what makes you think you have any more say, than electing officials who will vote the way you'd like, is how or what your taxes are spent on. Plenty of liberals wouldn't want their tax money spent on the military, however, we need the military so they need to suck it up. As do you when it somes to things you don't want tax money spent on.

Life is such a hardship huh?

ETA - Or where you suggesting that state taxes are ok and only federal taxes are evil?

Also seeing as every state in the union receives money from the federal govenment lots of what states spend is federal money.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Trade schools that teach a plethora of careers and skill sets are not unattainable. Nor are communit colleges. You're out of touch and living in the 70's

Trade schools are quite expensive.....on par with colleges

Nobody is hiring graduates with University degrees. You think they are going to chase after community college degrees?

Thats because the economy is shit. They arent chassing after any new hires unless some special tax credit comes along with them. And Trade Schools actually prepare you for the modern workforce as compared to all the extra bullshit that a traditional college makes you pay to learn. You get a return on your investment with Trade Schools. Ive got kids and nephews and nieces who have all taken that route and are doing fairly well. Most 4 year colleges imo (which I know you dont respect) are a waste of valuable time and money with the exception of a few fields of learning.

Apparently, RW thinks all educations are made the same. Are employers going to chase after you just because you have a "college degree", when that degree is in "Womyn's Studies"? NOW can only hire so many people, and not much of anyone else has a use for such a degree, completely aside from how unpleasant they are virtually guaranteed such an employee would be to have around. A degree in engineering, on the other hand, is a whole 'nother kettle of fish. Ditto pretty much any hard science degree. Trade school certification in one of the many fields that are struggling to find qualified applicants, such as welders, electricians, etc.? You could wind up in the center of a bidding war between employers in that case.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Thats because the economy is shit. They arent chassing after any new hires unless some special tax credit comes along with them. And Trade Schools actually prepare you for the modern workforce as compared to all the extra bullshit that a traditional college makes you pay to learn. You get a return on your investment with Trade Schools. Ive got kids and nephews and nieces who have all taken that route and are doing fairly well. Most 4 year colleges imo (which I know you dont respect) are a waste of valuable time and money with the exception of a few fields of learning.

I have one kid who went to college....Architecture
Another who went to trade school....Welding

Neither is fully employed

That sucks. Both have potential to do their own thing in their respective fields. I started out under someone else. I kept seeing his checks average around 5 or 6 k a week and he had no ambition. 3 months later I ditched him and went out on my own. Granted I had a different economy to work with but things will change eventually. I wish your kids the best.

If his kid is actually a qualified welder and can't get fully employed, I can only assume he's living in THE crappiest area of the country ever.
Around here, employers are fighting for qualifed, experienced welders.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Uhh it's the math that shows that the money is concentrating at the top.

You can blame the left but it's the Math.

Do you understand the difference between "having" something and "stealing" something? Or do you just assume, as most leftist fools do, that if someone has something you do not, he stole it, simply by definition?

Feeling guilty? I said nothing about stealing.

Read the title of the thread, Einstein, then you MIGHT actually write your very first post actually dealing with the topic. Only a liberal could read "guilt" into someone talking about the actual thread topic, rather than whatever it is the liberal in question has tried to hijack the thread into being about.

Let me help you out, since having read your posts up until now, I can clearly see that you're a bit . . . challenged, shall we say?

Thread Title: The left claims the rich are stealing all the money, what say you?

And then YOU come along and tell us that this is so, because "math tells us the money is concentrated at the top". This, of course, only proves that rich people HAVE money. HAVING something is not the same as STEALING it, which - as I have pointed out - is the actual topic here.

There. I hope this will be sufficient explanation for you, and you won't actually require me to draw crayon diagrams for you.

 

[Gideonprime]

Do you understand the difference between "having" something and "stealing" something? Or do you just assume, as most leftist fools do, that if someone has something you do not, he stole it, simply by definition?

Feeling guilty? I said nothing about stealing.

Read the title of the thread, Einstein, then you MIGHT actually write your very first post actually dealing with the topic. Only a liberal could read "guilt" into someone talking about the actual thread topic, rather than whatever it is the liberal in question has tried to hijack the thread into being about.

Let me help you out, since having read your posts up until now, I can clearly see that you're a bit . . . challenged, shall we say?

Thread Title: The left claims the rich are stealing all the money, what say you?

And then YOU come along and tell us that this is so, because "math tells us the money is concentrated at the top". This, of course, only proves that rich people HAVE money. HAVING something is not the same as STEALING it, which - as I have pointed out - is the actual topic here.

There. I hope this will be sufficient explanation for you, and you won't actually require me to draw crayon diagrams for you.

Frankly you can say whatever you like. That does not however make it correct.

What the concentration of wealth at the top shows is that they can afford to purchase the votes they need to tilt the scales in their favor.

Is that theft? I am sure you would say no.

 

[RDD_1210]

I don't have the desire or the time to research the tax codes of hundreds of other countries.

I'd rather try to get some sanity in ours

Hundreds? Just pick a few of your favorites.

Problem is, your version of "sanity" is impossible and hasn't been done anywhere before or currently.....and for a reason.

Perhaps your version isn't so sane. Just a thought.

You have no idea what my "version" is do you?

And if it hasn't been done before, whatever "it" is, how do you know it won't work?

Are you all so ovine minded that you simply agree with the powers that be no matter how badly they screw you over?

I thought you were all about hope and change but it seems you just hope things will get better as long as we don't try anything new.

Your "version" is that taxes are too high. You told us. Yet, the data shows that our taxes are not the highest in the world or even the highest in our countries history. So I am wondering how you are able to determine that they are too high. Gut feeling?

And I don't just blindly agree with anyone or anything, but you've failed to give me any sort of reason to believe that our taxes are too high. I've asked for you to give me something to grasp on to, but you've got nothing. I'd love to not pay taxes and live in a civilized society but that's not going to happen. So show me why your taxes are too high, I'm ready to believe. I just don't think you have any clue what you're talking about unfortunately and your refusing to provide answers to anything confirms that for me.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Feeling guilty? I said nothing about stealing.

Read the title of the thread, Einstein, then you MIGHT actually write your very first post actually dealing with the topic. Only a liberal could read "guilt" into someone talking about the actual thread topic, rather than whatever it is the liberal in question has tried to hijack the thread into being about.

Let me help you out, since having read your posts up until now, I can clearly see that you're a bit . . . challenged, shall we say?

Thread Title: The left claims the rich are stealing all the money, what say you?

And then YOU come along and tell us that this is so, because "math tells us the money is concentrated at the top". This, of course, only proves that rich people HAVE money. HAVING something is not the same as STEALING it, which - as I have pointed out - is the actual topic here.

There. I hope this will be sufficient explanation for you, and you won't actually require me to draw crayon diagrams for you.

Frankly you can say whatever you like. That does not however make it correct.

What the concentration of wealth at the top shows is that they can afford to purchase the votes they need to tilt the scales in their favor.

Is that theft? I am sure you would say no.

All you've just told me is that YOU will vote for whoever has the largest number of shiny, catchy ads. Since I wasn't finding your psychology all that hard to figure out - or all that interesting, either - I neither needed nor wanted this personal sharing from you. And since I know you're not bright enough to figure this out without being told let me just say: your willingness to sell your vote says nothing about anyone else.

As for "Is that theft?", try using your Internet connection to check out a dictionary once in a while in place of the porn sites.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Uhh it's the math that shows that the money is concentrating at the top.

You can blame the left but it's the Math.

First I want to say that "THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT TAXES"

Now that that is out of the way lets address your idiotic post.

You can do math till youre blue in the face and all you get are results that show 2 things:

1. The rich are rich and you (apparently) are not.....why is that?
2. There are more rich today than ever in the past...why is that?


Did the rich take money from you? They certainly didnt from me. In fact the rich support the bottom half of our country as well as the govt. That is MANY get their money and necessities met specifically BECAUSE OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE RICH.

Then you have the fact that their are many more "rich" today than ever in the past. Could it be that they fucking worked harder and risked more than the average American? How many risks have you taken with your career and your assets? Or are you content in your cubicle? Dont blame others for your lack of ambition.

Then we have people LIKE YOU who convince the bottom half that their plight is not of their own making. Thus enabeling them to become even more complacent in their dead end lives and making them believe your complete nonsense that its someone elses fault.

Anyone and everyone has the same basic opportunities in life. Its up to them as individuals to do something about it. Im living proof.
At 20 years of age I was released after 3 years in prison. Upon release I went to college and trade school to better my life. I didnt sit around and moan about how fucked up my childhood was and make excuses for my position in life. I took arguably the worst scenario a person could be in and turned it into a business that has survived for around 23 years now.

In fact one could argue that my life is growing largely as a result of the contributions of the rich. Their successes in life have enabled them to retain my services, which then TRICKLE down to everyone that works for me as well as their families.

The rich are nothing more than a punching bag for people like you because youre too afraid to place the blame for your shortcomings where they belong.......ON YOU.

If you don't feel the rich have stolen from you, it's probably because you don't have an IRA. Three times I've watched mine grow slowly over the years and then fall like the flushing of a toilet. And I've never even had particularly risky investments. Our illustrious financial leaders have created a bubble machine par excellance. They should be dragged from their homes and offices and shot in the head.

I have retirement savings and let me tell you that the government has made sure that IRAs, 401Ks etc are not that good of a deal.

For one all the growth gets taxed at the regular income rate.

Tell me how is the government watching out for the middle class by fucking them out of their retirement income with a higher tax rate?

Then the government will tell you how much money you have to withdraw every year or else they penalize you.

You'd be better off investing your money after taxes in a private account. Then you would only pay the long term capital gains rate and you would be able to control how much you take out every year.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Hundreds? Just pick a few of your favorites.

Problem is, your version of "sanity" is impossible and hasn't been done anywhere before or currently.....and for a reason.

Perhaps your version isn't so sane. Just a thought.

You have no idea what my "version" is do you?

And if it hasn't been done before, whatever "it" is, how do you know it won't work?

Are you all so ovine minded that you simply agree with the powers that be no matter how badly they screw you over?

I thought you were all about hope and change but it seems you just hope things will get better as long as we don't try anything new.

Your "version" is that taxes are too high. You told us. Yet, the data shows that our taxes are not the highest in the world or even the highest in our countries history. So I am wondering how you are able to determine that they are too high. Gut feeling?

And I don't just blindly agree with anyone or anything, but you've failed to give me any sort of reason to believe that our taxes are too high. I've asked for you to give me something to grasp on to, but you've got nothing. I'd love to not pay taxes and live in a civilized society but that's not going to happen. So show me why your taxes are too high, I'm ready to believe. I just don't think you have any clue what you're talking about unfortunately and your refusing to provide answers to anything confirms that for me.

Common sense.

The federal government takes taxes then gives some with all kinds of strings attached back to the states.

That is inefficient. Not to mention a blatant way to subvert the sovereignty of the states.

We have nearly 50% of the population not paying income taxes and some of those people actually receive refunds that are greater than the taxes they paid in.

You people love to talk about "fair shares" and "shared burdens" and yet you excuse nearly 50% of the population. That makes no sense at all.

So just using those two examples we could easily lower the federal tax rate by letting states raise the taxes they need and spend that revenue with no federal coercion and by lowering the rate of federal income taxes and broadening the base to include everyone not just some.

Next we have to tackle the problem of the billions of dollars wasted by the government every year. Having a tight reign on the budget would allow a further reduction of taxes.

So tell me would you rather pay for the waste and inefficiency and let nearly half the population get a free ride or would you rather keep some more of your own money ?

 

[RDD_1210]

You have no idea what my "version" is do you?

And if it hasn't been done before, whatever "it" is, how do you know it won't work?

Are you all so ovine minded that you simply agree with the powers that be no matter how badly they screw you over?

I thought you were all about hope and change but it seems you just hope things will get better as long as we don't try anything new.

Your "version" is that taxes are too high. You told us. Yet, the data shows that our taxes are not the highest in the world or even the highest in our countries history. So I am wondering how you are able to determine that they are too high. Gut feeling?

And I don't just blindly agree with anyone or anything, but you've failed to give me any sort of reason to believe that our taxes are too high. I've asked for you to give me something to grasp on to, but you've got nothing. I'd love to not pay taxes and live in a civilized society but that's not going to happen. So show me why your taxes are too high, I'm ready to believe. I just don't think you have any clue what you're talking about unfortunately and your refusing to provide answers to anything confirms that for me.

Common sense.

The federal government takes taxes then gives some with all kinds of strings attached back to the states.

That is inefficient. Not to mention a blatant way to subvert the sovereignty of the states.

We have nearly 50% of the population not paying income taxes and some of those people actually receive refunds that are greater than the taxes they paid in.

You people love to talk about "fair shares" and "shared burdens" and yet you excuse nearly 50% of the population. That makes no sense at all.

So just using those two examples we could easily lower the federal tax rate by letting states raise the taxes they need and spend that revenue with no federal coercion and by lowering the rate of federal income taxes and broadening the base to include everyone not just some.

Next we have to tackle the problem of the billions of dollars wasted by the government every year. Having a tight reign on the budget would allow a further reduction of taxes.

So tell me would you rather pay for the waste and inefficiency and let nearly half the population get a free ride or would you rather keep some more of your own money ?

Oh I get it, you're not so concerned how much your taxes are as you much as you're concerned what others are paying, or in your mind not paying. So I assume you were against the bush tax cuts then? I get it though, this is jealousy of the poor and in your mind that 50% have it good since they get a break on their federal income taxes. Never mind that they still pay SS, payroll, medicare, etc.....to you, our tax system is broken because they are getting a "free ride".

I don't want to support lazy moochers either, but many of our poor and middle class genuinely need help. How do we differentiate the two? Seems you think everything with our system will be better if all of those "free loaders" were made to pay like you have to.

I get it, you don't have examples of countries with better tax structures our a time in our own history with a better tax structure but you just know our system is bad because you're jealous that the poorest among us get a break on a portion of their taxes. Sounds like some good old class warfare to me.

 

[zeke]

I get it, you don't have examples of countries with better tax structures our a time in our own history with a better tax structure but you just know our system is bad because you're jealous that the poorest among us get a break on a portion of their taxes. Sounds like some good old class warfare to me.

Someone wrote the tax code in such a way that the poorest among us do not pay much if any Federal tax.

Now, who could have written that tax code is such a way? Was it the poor peoples lobbyist? Probably not. Was it a poor person in Congress. Definitely not. Who was it? Was it a negotiated into a tax bill proposed by rethugs so that the rich could pay less taxes and the Dems in Congress extracted a bit of tax advantage for those that tend to vote for Dems? Hmmm. Could be. Damn, who knew the poor people had such a good lobbyist. Really pisses the rethugs off. Good job.

 

[The Rabbi]

I get it, you don't have examples of countries with better tax structures our a time in our own history with a better tax structure but you just know our system is bad because you're jealous that the poorest among us get a break on a portion of their taxes. Sounds like some good old class warfare to me.

Someone wrote the tax code in such a way that the poorest among us do not pay much if any Federal tax.

Now, who could have written that tax code is such a way? Was it the poor peoples lobbyist? Probably not. Was it a poor person in Congress. Definitely not. Who was it? Was it a negotiated into a tax bill proposed by rethugs so that the rich could pay less taxes and the Dems in Congress extracted a bit of tax advantage for those that tend to vote for Dems? Hmmm. Could be. Damn, who knew the poor people had such a good lobbyist. Really pisses the rethugs off. Good job.

You really are fucking stupid and uninformed, aren't you?
First, it isn't the poorest among us who pay no taxes. It is 50% of the working population. Second, not only do they not pay taxes, they get more in refunds than they pay in. Third, who wrote that shit into the tax code? How about Democrats pandering for votes from poor people? Yeah, remember them? The ones who hav controlled Congress since 2006.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Your "version" is that taxes are too high. You told us. Yet, the data shows that our taxes are not the highest in the world or even the highest in our countries history. So I am wondering how you are able to determine that they are too high. Gut feeling?

And I don't just blindly agree with anyone or anything, but you've failed to give me any sort of reason to believe that our taxes are too high. I've asked for you to give me something to grasp on to, but you've got nothing. I'd love to not pay taxes and live in a civilized society but that's not going to happen. So show me why your taxes are too high, I'm ready to believe. I just don't think you have any clue what you're talking about unfortunately and your refusing to provide answers to anything confirms that for me.

Common sense.

The federal government takes taxes then gives some with all kinds of strings attached back to the states.

That is inefficient. Not to mention a blatant way to subvert the sovereignty of the states.

We have nearly 50% of the population not paying income taxes and some of those people actually receive refunds that are greater than the taxes they paid in.

You people love to talk about "fair shares" and "shared burdens" and yet you excuse nearly 50% of the population. That makes no sense at all.

So just using those two examples we could easily lower the federal tax rate by letting states raise the taxes they need and spend that revenue with no federal coercion and by lowering the rate of federal income taxes and broadening the base to include everyone not just some.

Next we have to tackle the problem of the billions of dollars wasted by the government every year. Having a tight reign on the budget would allow a further reduction of taxes.

So tell me would you rather pay for the waste and inefficiency and let nearly half the population get a free ride or would you rather keep some more of your own money ?

Oh I get it, you're not so concerned how much your taxes are as you much as you're concerned what others are paying, or in your mind not paying. So I assume you were against the bush tax cuts then? I get it though, this is jealousy of the poor and in your mind that 50% have it good since they get a break on their federal income taxes. Never mind that they still pay SS, payroll, medicare, etc.....to you, our tax system is broken because they are getting a "free ride".

So it's OK with you that 50% of people pay no income tax and that some actually receive a refund larger than the taxes they paid in?

Isn't that one of your lynch pin arguments that we all live in a society and we are all better off for it? So then why shouldn't we all pay taxes?

I don't want to support lazy moochers either, but many of our poor and middle class genuinely need help. How do we differentiate the two? Seems you think everything with our system will be better if all of those "free loaders" were made to pay like you have to.

I didn't use terms like freeloader. That's you attempting to put words in my mouth and failing. And I don't think anyone should pay the tax rate that I do. 23% of anyone's income getting confiscated by the government is too much.

I get it, you don't have examples of countries with better tax structures our a time in our own history with a better tax structure but you just know our system is bad because you're jealous that the poorest among us get a break on a portion of their taxes. Sounds like some good old class warfare to me.

Why do we have to use some other country as an example?

Are you incapable of innovative thought to the extent that a new way of collecting revenue is completely beyond you?



And I'm not jealous of anyone. Fair and equal treatment of all citizens is objective and devoid of emotion

 

[Too Tall]

I have been self employed for 23 years or so. I lost my retirement in my divorce to my ex-wife so I could keep the business. She isn't rich.

I lose mega taxes everyday to local and federal govts. They aren't the rich.

This economy has made it very difficult to recover to previous levels. The economy isn't rich.

Slowly I'm rebuilding lost wealth with no help from anyone but myself. I am not rich but I am very comfortable.

There are greedy people among us but for the most part they only get what you allow them to take from you. The biggest thief of all time is the United States Congress. And YOU do have control over them IF you choose to exercise it.

You should be like Mitt Romney. He has over $100 million in his IRA. He must be pretty darn smart to accomplish that since the max you can put in per year is $6,000.

Don't blame Mitt because you're a loser and don't offshore your money to avoid paying taxes.

I didn't make $100 million, but I did make a substantial amount of money in my self-directed IRA by buying and selling stocks. For example, the 500 shares of Apple (AAPL) that I bought in 2003 @$7.50 a share cost me $3750.00 and are now worth a little over $303,000. I did not have to pay any capital gains tax on the earnings, but when I draw the money out of my IRA, it will be taxed as ordinary income.